Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    Maybe, perhaps we need a system where people sign up to do teaching before they start their final year, which would mean only those truely interested would sign up.
    Hmm, no, I don't really think it's that important whether they are 'truly interested'. I'd say higher standards when they come to do the PGCE/SCITT though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think there should be much less emphasis on academic brilliance. Yeah it's great to do well academically, but different people are good at different things and no one should be made to feel like a failure because they are more suited to practical work.

    Right now the system is if not enough student do well in their GCSE's and A levels or go to university the school fails, but there is nothing to say these students aren’t get excellent jobs in fields that don't require memorizing facts and sitting writing essays etc. Schools should give their student options and not be penalised for that, I know at my school everyone was being pushed into university and when I asked about options I was told 'we won’t look at apprenticeship because your grades are too high' regardless of what I would prefer.

    Sorry that’s long and of the point but that’s where, imo, schools fail. It leads to larger classes and a need for more money for people who would clearly do better doing something else. It also leads to ‘degree inflation’ etc etc.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Grammar schools are an awful idea... while many grammar schools get good results, what are the implications for kids who don't pass the 11+? It'll ultimately result in two-tier schooling with all the money+resources going to the grammars and the kids in the comps not really being given the opportunity to advance.

    Intelligence and aspiration should not be decided at age 11, I know loads of people who did poorly in key stage 2 sats but brilliantly at GCSE/A Level and vice versa.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kater Murr)
    Hmm, no, I don't really think it's that important whether they are 'truly interested'. I'd say higher standards when they come to do the PGCE/SCITT though.
    At my school I noticed a lot of difference between teachers who were there by choice and those who were there through neccessity. It doesn't really matter anyway I guess; you could swap the private school teachers with the normal school teachers and the private school teachers in the poor school would do just as badly as the previous teachers because it's the students who are terrible.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    Maybe, perhaps we need a system where people sign up to do teaching before they start their final year, which would mean only those truely interested would sign up.
    That would be stupid. My best teacher and probably the reason I did so well at maths at A levels and doing well now was a person who got 2.2 in Physics. But, lol the best teachers are not always the best learners.

    (Original post by *R*a*c*h*)
    Intelligence and aspiration should not be decided at age 11, I know loads of people who did poorly in key stage 2 sats but brilliantly at GCSE/A Level and vice versa.
    I did poorly intill the A levels and even then only after repeat of A levels. But, yeah it seems stupid to basically put so called best students in better schools at the age of 11 then have the rejects go to a crappy one.


    P.S. Its pretty horrible this plan, certainly the worst is emphasis on exams, which will only create a state of rote learning to pass exams. If at 11 your life is decided by a test then there would be a even greater focus on exams.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    At my school I noticed a lot of difference between teachers who were there by choice and those who were there through neccessity. It doesn't really matter anyway I guess; you could swap the private school teachers with the normal school teachers and the private school teachers in the poor school would do just as badly as the previous teachers because it's the students who are terrible.
    So are you trying to say that rich people are some how superior to poor students? That explains why half the top conservatives are Eton students. You been told of from using anecdotal evidence, stop doing it. To be fair the best teacher I have had where doing it by neccessity as they cared about if they lose the job.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simplicity)
    That would be stupid. My best teacher and probably the reason I did so well at maths at A levels and doing well now was a person who got 2.2 in Physics. But, lol the best teachers are not always the best learners.


    I did poorly intill the A levels and even then only after repeat of A levels. But, yeah it seems stupid to basically put so called best students in better schools at the age of 11 then have the rejects go to a crappy one.


    P.S. Its pretty horrible this plan, certainly the worst is emphasis on exams, which will only create a state of rote learning to pass exams. If at 11 your life is decided by a test then there would be a even greater focus on exams.
    I didn't say the best teachers are neccessarily the best learners. My argument implied that the best teachers are those whose heart is in it, if you can disagree with that?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simplicity)
    So are you trying to say that rich people are some how superior to poor students? That explains why half the top conservatives are Eton students.
    I think their home lives and parenting is superior, by far. At my school they could have had Stephen Hawkins teaching physics, but the students would have just wheeled him down the stairs and learnt nothing.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    I didn't say the best teachers are neccessarily the best learners. My argument implied that the best teachers are those whose heart is in it, if you can disagree with that?
    I disagree. Well, 2.2 would test the best learner not neccessary teacher. Do you agree with this policy? i.e. everyone has to get a 2.2.

    I disagree again. Heart has nothing to do if you are a good teacher. I think its more personality of the teacher and how good they are at communicating with students.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Why are people against grammar schools? I think they should be massively increased tbh.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubbles*de*Milo)
    Why are people against grammar schools? I think they should be massively increased tbh.
    Because there not the best way of increasing social mobility.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    I think their home lives and parenting is superior, by far. At my school they could have had Stephen Hawkins teaching physics, but the students would have just wheeled him down the stairs and learnt nothing.
    Funny you mention Hawking, as he had unimpressive results during most of university. It was only after he was diagonised with motor neuron disease and told he had five years to live that he started to focus.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simplicity)
    I disagree. Well, 2.2 would test the best learner not neccessary teacher. Do you agree with this policy? i.e. everyone has to get a 2.2.

    I disagree again. Heart has nothing to do if you are a good teacher. I think its more personality of the teacher and how good they are at communicating with students.
    I think a 2.2+ minimum is important because you have to learn something in order to teach it, otherwise you could be teaching something wrong or uncomplete. Furthermore you have to love teaching and not be in it for the money to cope; especially at state school level. It is long hours with low appreciation.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simplicity)
    Funny you mention Hawking, as he had unimpressive results during most of university. It was only after he was diagonised with motor neuron disease and told he had five years to live that he started to focus.
    How is that interesting in any way? You have not addressed the point of the post at all.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JNV)
    Because there not the best way of increasing social mobility.

    Giving poorer but more able kids the chance of an education on par with one from the private sector, so they have alot more opportunities?

    Yeah, awful! :rolleyes:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Christ, I've never seen such idiocy among people for assuming that a selective grammar school system necessitates the 11+
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    I think a 2.2+ minimum is important because you have to learn something in order to teach it, otherwise you could be teaching something wrong or uncomplete. Furthermore you have to love teaching and not be in it for the money to cope; especially at state school level. It is long hours with low appreciation.
    A 2.2 minimum is very different to a 2.1 minimum...
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kater Murr)
    Hmm, no, I don't really think it's that important whether they are 'truly interested'. I'd say higher standards when they come to do the PGCE/SCITT though.
    Hm, you know, you don't need a degree to do a PGCE.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubbles*de*Milo)
    Giving poorer but more able kids the chance of an education on par with one from the private sector, so they have alot more opportunities?

    Yeah, awful! :rolleyes:
    Your forgeting the other 4/5 of students who didnt get that opportunity under the grammar school system. How can you decide someones academic future at 11 years of age.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JNV)
    Your forgeting the other 4/5 of students who didnt get that opportunity under the grammar school system. How can you decide someones academic future at 11 years of age.

    That's why I said they should be massively increased/expanded.
 
 
 
Poll
Are you chained to your phone?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.